Ain't no doubt about it, Zack.
Posted on 09/05/2008 5:27:29 PM PDT by ZACKandPOOK
The FBI's Investigation of Bruce Ivins and Its Conclusions
Marilyn W. Thompson, Pulitzer Prize-winning Investigative Reporter and Editor for The Washington Post
She talks of the "big remaining holes" in the case against Ivins. The scientific analysis led to a flask which was the parent of isolates accessible to a 100 plus known people. The press has filed a motion seeking to unseal the evidence filed in the case from the start. The first caller perhaps is Professor Frances Boyle (perhaps not but I strongly suspect it is), a local law professor there with definite political views and his own theory of Amerithrax.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8PrTXtHDyI
It’s a slam dunk! ;)
Here is a clickable link to the 1 minute video explaining that the correct solution instead leads to the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense that was infiltrated by a man actively working with the 911 imam and Bin Laden’s sheik.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8PrTXtHDyI
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20080905/pl_cq_politics/politics2944683_2
Members of the House Judiciary Committee made clear Friday they expect more answers from the FBI about its August announcement that a government scientist was responsible for the 2001 anthrax attacks on Capitol Hill and elsewhere.
Committee members submitted a list of questions they want Director Robert S. Mueller III to answer about the anthrax investigation in advance of his first Capitol Hill appearance since the FBI announced Bruce E. Ivins was solely responsible for the attack. Mueller is to appear before the panel Sept. 16.
(Good news...but...)
Among the questions they want Mueller to address are whether White House officials initially pressed the FBI to show the attacks were linked to al Qaeda or Iraq and why another government scientist, Steven Hatfill, remained a suspect in the investigation. Judiciary Committee Democrats also want Mueller to explain why Ivins retained his security clearance after becoming the prime suspect in the attacks.
Probably the least important things about this case.
Should ask science questions like “Did the spores from the flask also test positive for silicon and oxygen? You didn’t test them? Why the heck not?
my understanding for Ed Lake was that the anthrax was not weaponized.
Go to Ed’s website,
http://www.anthraxinvestigation.com/
“House Judiciary Wants Answers From FBI Chief on Anthrax
By Seth Stern, CQ Staff
Members of the House Judiciary Committee made clear Friday they expect more answers from the FBI about its August announcement that a government scientist was responsible for the 2001 anthrax attacks on Capitol Hill and elsewhere.
Committee members submitted a list of questions they want Director Robert S. Mueller III to answer about the anthrax investigation in advance of his first Capitol Hill appearance since the FBI announced Bruce E. Ivins was solely responsible for the attack. Mueller is to appear before the panel Sept. 16.
Ivins, a microbiologist who worked at a U.S. military research institute at Fort Detrick, Md., committed suicide as federal officials prepared to indict him.
“Important and lingering questions remain that are crucial for you to address, especially since there will never be a trail to examine the facts of the case,” wrote Judiciary Chairman John Conyers Jr. , D-Mich., in a letter co-signed by two subcommittee chairmen.
Among the questions they want Mueller to address are whether White House officials initially pressed the FBI to show the attacks were linked to al Qaeda or Iraq and why another government scientist, Steven Hatfill, remained a suspect in the investigation. Judiciary Committee Democrats also want Mueller to explain why Ivins retained his security clearance after becoming the prime suspect in the attacks.
Ivins’ attorney has maintained his client was innocent and lawmakers in both parties have called for an independent investigation......”
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000002944683
They did test the flask anthrax for silicon signature and found that it was not in the flask.
The FBI WMD head said that the silica apparently was in the culture medium. That is the method used to concentrate anthrax under a March 14, 2001 patent application filed by the leading anthrax scientist and former USAMRIID deputy commander at the Center for Biodefense at GMU.
When the patent issued it went to Ali Al-Timimi’s maildrop — his office was 15 feet from the leading anthrax scientist and former deputy USAMRIID commander. Ali is suspected by the FBI of accessing the biochemistry information but not of actually aerosolizing the anthrax or mailing it.
The game is still afoot.
If you think the US DOJ’s explanation of Amerithrax makes little sense, check out their explanation of Aafia Siddiqui’s last 5 years.
Ain't no doubt about it, Zack.
bump for later read
“They did test the flask anthrax for silicon signature and found that it was not in the flask.”
Um, that seems very damning to the “natural” silicon argument for which they support with a 40 year old study. Or it’s not the mother material.
Did they offer an explanation?
Oh I see. The culture medium.
OK, is silicon in “culture medium?” Did they test any?
Were you able to hear the entire Thompson interview?
I seem to have a bad connection volume wise regardless of method.
An air force military lab that does biodefense work did a controlled study using a siliconizing solution in the culture medium or nutrient bath and without it. There was the high silicon spike in the aerosolized anthrax when it was used and not when it was not used. It is possible to make “pure spores” without the siliconizing solution. Produced either way, he says, the aerosolized anthrax floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee. The head of the lab, who I’ve known for years, has sent me the SEMS and related peer reviewed studies recently published. There are reasons some things are not published.
As explained by Kathryn Crockett, once two doors down from Al-Timimi, the use of an encapsulation method allows less expensive equipment to be used in drying. It was a method first developed in the pharmaceutical and food area. In the GMU Gazette article explaining the patent that had been the subject of the March 14, 2001 patent application it was billed as “biofriendly.”
To debate whether it was “weaponized” is silly — it is just a word that is being used in an undefined way. Sandia was using it to describe anthrax processed using the traditional Dugway method that has been used for years. This method instead was used in the culture medium. In the patent, it explained that it serves to overcome vanderwaals forces. So Dr. Alibek was correct. Silica or not is not dispositive on the question it was “state-sponsored.” Moreover, a sophisticated product can result from a relatively simple method. The head of the air force lab tells me that Ed overestimates the importance of the exosporium for these purposes. Moreover, Ed does not appreciate that it is not sound to talk about how to best weaponize anthrax.
But if the FBI hopes to pin the Amerithrax murders on a dead man, it better find some solid evidence.
Yes, the journalist, moderator, and several callers were all very thoughtful — even though clueless about this discussion above.
You, too, Prunetacos would do well to read the letter written by Aafia’s attorney to the federal magistrate filed yesterday (at http://www.cryptome.org ) and ask:
what the heck is going on? Where was Aafia for 5 years? If she was picked up by ISI shortly after KSM, and is a “treasure trove” of information, including US-based operatives and Al Qaeda cells, then perhaps there is a lot more interesting than silicon that the FBI and CIA is not telling us.
Zawahiri considers war to require deception. Maybe US DOJ does also.
“But if the FBI hopes to pin the Amerithrax murders on a dead man, it better find some solid evidence.”
This we agree upon.
Ask the Editor — A marathon, not a sprint
http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/news/display.htm?StoryID=79844
One aspect of the coverage that we are particularly proud of is that we didn’t use a single unnamed source, as many of the larger papers did.
The oft-quoted “sources close to the investigation” was a common sight.
This actually highlights one of the frustrations with our coverage. We don’t have well-placed anonymous sources at the FBI or Department of Justice.
Not that we would use them anyway. The Frederick News-Post has a strict policy to not use anonymous sources unless there’s absolutely no other way to get at a story. And even then, our reporters need to get approval before doing so.
The idea behind not using anonymous sources is that we understand the media have a credibility problem with news consumers. That’s why every measure is taken to have sources be accountable for the information they provide and, in turn, have us be accountable for who we get information from.
***
That’s OK. There are other ways to skin a cat. We’re using the Freedom of Information Act and pursuing other leads to get at this story.
We are not stopping.
Just because the story has subsided nationally in favor of veep nominees and tropical storms that may or may not turn out to be hurricanes, that doesn’t mean our work on Ivins is done.
This story has too many questions, too many threads to pull on, and who knows where they lead.
There are already countless conspiracy theories about Ivins and more come each day. Some are far-fetched, but others are worth checking into.
For The Frederick News-Post, unraveling the Ivins mystery will be a marathon, not a sprint. And you’ll know just where we obtained every bit of information.
Charlie’s Marathon Training Happy Place
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_1J6qoav24
Mueller is to appear before the panel Sept. 16.
I think the correct date is Sept. 17. And the NPR interview says there will be other hearings, but no fixed dates have yet been set.
The NPR interview is very interesting, and, since it's an .mpg file, it's easy to download and save.
The silicon in the spores in the letters seems to have come from the nutrients in which the bacteria grew -- or the water. If there was no silicon in the spores that were in the flask, that probably just means the bacteria weren't grown using the same nutrients used to grow the bacteria for the letters.
All the details about the location of the silicon in the attack spores will be released in scientific papers.
I think that, in time, most reasonable questions will be answered -- except for those which require getting inside the mind of the culprit.
Ed, you’ve done very good work channeling these points about the method being relatively simple, coming from the environment, etc. Don’t stop while you are at the finish line. The relevant question is: Did Bruce Ivins know the method?
The forensic finding of the silicon signature points to someone with knowledge of the confidential biochemistry information and method subject to the patent application. If it had been “prior art,” it would not have been patentable.
For different purposes, in 2006 or 2007 (I forget), I had most of the bottled water in the US tested at a New York and Pennsylvania labs. (There was one recall in stores throughout the Northeast because of a carcinogen found.) In my lay opinion, the silica didn’t come from the water. Moreover, isotope ratios indicate it was grown in the Northeastern United States which has less problematic water than some parts of the US. The high arsenic in Alburquerque tap water is not as unusual in other parts of the country as people might think — there are hot spots in different parts of the country you would not expect. But the high silicon content (the exact level has now been disclosed by AFIP) is not something that would be found in the water. A silica-based substance was added to the culture medium.
Now one could get into 5 years more of debate whether silica is sophisticated or not. One could debate whether something that is added is an additive or not. One could debate whether the silicon dioxide that served to concentrate the anthrax made it easier to achieve “pure spores.” (That is its purpose). But that would be misdirected focus. In terms of true crime analysis, the relevant lead points to the patented method for using silicon dioxide to concentrate anthrax filed by the founders of the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense, whose halls had been infiltrated by a man working with the 911 imam and Bin Laden’s sheik. Zawahiri and the blind sheik’s followers thought the koran and hadiths required that they use the weapon of their enemy.
Your theory, Ed, that it was not the modus operandi of US-based supporters of Al Qaeda, respectfully, is mistaken. The CIA has just held their cards tight to their chest. Aafia Siddiqui, for example, who apparently has been in custody for the past half-decade since shortly after Al-Timimi’s townhouse was searched, allegedly planned on simultaneously poisoning all three former Presidents with a biological pathogen. What was the biological pathogen? An AUSA has previously said in open court that she was willing to participate in an anthrax attack. Her husband worked with the man with the anthrax spraydrying documments on his laptop.
A plan to poison the embassy in Rome using cyanide dates back 7 years as modus operandi and Aafia allegedly was carrying a liter when she was arrested. (Though all allegations need special scrutiny in that matter as they do in connection with Bruce Ivins).
Now the US DOJ cannot talk about this because Al-Timimi is on trial for sedition. Aafia Siddiqui is on trial for murder and no terrorism charges have been leveled. But one thing we could agree on is that unnamed sources have suggested that Aafia is a treasure trove of information about US-based operatives. And she seems not to be cooperating with her attorneys. While it suggests that the federal magistrate should take an active role in assuring she is competent to stand trial and not under duress, it bodes trouble for any US-based operatives who were known to her. As was true for Dr. Ivins, just because you are paranoid does not mean you are not under close surveillance.
I’ll confess that this Al-Timimi Aafia Siddiqui stuff is greek to me.
So who mailed the letters in Princeton, Zack?
While it remains a mystery as to how Aafia has spent her past 5 years, for at least the past 4 years I’ve argued she was picked up by the ISI and held under house arrest.
Here is an excerpt from a letter from Aafia Siddiqui’s lawyer.
The Honorable Rlchard E. Berman
United States Dlstrlct Judge
Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007
Re : U . S . v. Aafia ~idd4-08 C r . 92b
Dear Judge Berman,
***
In March of 2003, Dr- Siddiqui was visiting her family
in Pakistan with her children. She embarked on a journey
with her children from Karachi to Islamabad and
disappeared. It is the government’s position that she
abandoned her children and became an Al-Queda operative in
Pakistan and Afghanistan. In contrast, there is widespread
belief that Dr. Siddiqui was abducted in 2003 and held as a
prisoner, suffering torture and inhumane treatment. until
she was released to be arrested in Afghanistan on July 17,
2008.
By a11 accounts, Dr. Siddiqui was detained by Afghani
police on July 17, 2008 with an li year oid boy. parts o f
the interrogation by the Afghanis of Dr. Siddiqui and the
boy were filmed and can be viewed on YouTube. On July 18,
2008, as a result of the incident that is the subject of
this indictment, Dr. Siddiqui was shot at least once in the
abdomen. She spent two weeks at the notorious Bagram
Airforce Base where she was labeled an “enemy combatant”
and held in four point restraints with FBI agents
monitoring her 24 hours a day.
FN Yesterday, I spoke to an investigative reporter for
the Washington Post who informed me that she had reliable
sources in both the American and Pakistani government who
have verified that Dr. Siddiqui was taken into custody by
Pakistani military intelligence in 2003. According to her
sources, Dr. Siddiqui was then transferred to CIA custody
where she was held in rendition for the last five years
with at least one if not two of her children.
Perhaps Aafia knows the identity of the mailer and processor and how and where the Ames strain was accessed.
I believe the indictment says that her thumb drive contained correspondence about cells and attacks. Once it is established where Aafia has been, that she is adequately represented by counsel, then the question arises: What US-based operatives does Aafia know? (Her appointed counsel seems to be doing a truly superb job but Aafia appears not to be cooperating) Who does Aafia know? Aulaqi the 911 imam? Al-Timimi? El-Shukrijumah? Jdey? Was Jdey the mailer?
There is an excellent 2007 GMU PhD thesis on the question of infiltration of the US biodefense establishment titled “An Assessment of Exploitable Weaknesses in Universities.” As a case study, she addressed the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense at George Mason University.
The case study is more revealing in the context of the the historical example of Zawahiri’s head of intelligence Ali Mohammed, who was a US Army sergeant, informant for the FBI, and briefly worked for the CIA. The lesson is that if we don’t learn from history, we are bound to repeat it.
Ali Al-Timimi, a scientist working with the “911 imam,” worked at George Mason University’s Discovery Hall throughout 2000 and 2002 period. The Mason Gazette in “Mason to Pursue Advanced Biodefense Research” on November 17, 2000 had announced: “The School of Computational Sciences (SCS) and Advanced Biosystems, Inc., a subsidiary of Hadron, Inc., of Alexandria, are pursuing a collaborative program at the Prince William Campus to enhance research and educational objectives in biodefense research. The article noted that the program was funded primarily by a grant awarded to Advanced Biosystems from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). The 2007 GMU PhD thesis “An Assessment of Exploitable Weaknesses in Universities” by Corinne M. Verzoni explained that the offices and research located in Discovery Hall made it an attractive building on the Prince William Campus to target for information and technology.” The 2007 PhD student biodefense student explained: “Discovery Hall currently has BSL 1, 2 and 2+ labs in which students work with attenuated and vaccine strains of Fracella tularemia, anthrax and HIV. GMU will eventually have new biological labs featuring a BSL-3 lab which will have anthrax and tularemia.”
Instead of starting a center from scratch, GMU chose to join forces with Dr. Alibek and Dr. Bailey’s existing research firm, Hadron Advanced Biosystems Inc. Hadron was already working under contract for the federal government, having received funding from DARPA. Dr. Alibek told the Washington Post that he and Bailey had spent their careers studying an issue that only recently grabbed the country’s attention, after the anthrax mailings the previous fall. Dr. Bailey and Alibek met in 1991, when a delegation of Soviet scientists visited the USAMRIID at Ft. Detrick. Dr. Bailey explained that the purpose of the tour was to show the Soviets that the US was not developing offensive biological weapons. Bailey said he tried to engage Alibek in conversation but Alibek remained aloof. Alibek, for his part, explains that he was suspicious of this American smiling so broadly at him. A year later, Alibek would defect to the US and reveal an illegal biological program in the Soviet Union of a staggering scope. Alibek says that one reason he defected was that he realized that the Soviet intelligence was wrong — that the US research was in fact only defensive.
Former USAMRIID Deputy Commander and Acting Commander Ames researcher Bailey coinvented, with Ken Alibek, the process to treat cell culture with hydrophobic silicon dioxide so as to permit greater concentration upon drying. He was in Room 156B of GMU’s Discovery Hall at the Center for Biodefense. The patent application was filed March 14, 2001. Rm 154A was Victor Morozov’s room number when he first assumed Timimi’s phone number in 2004 (and before he moved to the newly constructed Bull Run Hall). Morozov was the co-inventor with Dr. Bailey of the related cell culture process under which the silica was removed from the spore surface.
One ATCC former employee felt so strongly about lax security there the scientist called me out of the blue and said that the public was overlooking the patent repository as a possible source of the Ames strain. ATCC does not deny they had virulent Ames in their patent repository pre 9/11 (as distinguished from their online catalog). The spokesperson emailed me: “As a matter of policy, ATCC does not disclose information on the contents of its patent depository.”
George Mason University, Department Listings, accessed August 17, 2003, shows that the National Center For Biodefense and Center for Biomedical Genomics had the same mail stop (MS 4ES). The most famed bioweaponeer in the world was not far from this sheik urging violent jihad in an apocalyptic struggle between religions. Dr. Alibek’s office was Rm. 156D in Prince William 2. The groups both shared the same department fax of 993-4288. Dr. Alibek advises me he had seen him several times in the corridors of GMU and was told that he was a religious muslim hard-liner but knew nothing of his activities. At one point, Timimi’s mail drop was MSN 4D7.
BIODEFENSE, THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8545 . . . . . . FAX 993-4288 . . . . . . . . MS 4E3
www.gmu.edu/centers/biodefense
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
KEN ALIBEK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156D Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-8545
Deputy Director
Charles Bailey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156B Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-4271
Partnerships and Education Assistant
Mary-Margaret Flannery . . . . . . . . 182B Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-4263
Research
Kathryn Crockett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Prince William II . . . . . . . . . 3-4297
Anne Keleher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156A Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-8396
Research Assistant Professor
Monique Van Hoek . . . . . . . . . . . . 156E Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-4273
BIOMEDICAL GENOMICS, CENTER FOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2674 . . . . . . FAX 993-4288 . . . . . . . . MS 4E3
www.gmu.edu/centers/genomics
DIRECTOR
VIKAS CHANDHOKE . . . . . . . . . . 181B Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-2674
*Christina Largent . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182F Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-2674
Assistant Director of Operations
Tom Huff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225D Prince William II . . . . . . . . 3-1255
George Mason University - Department Listings 12
Al-Timimi, Ali . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4294
DelGiacco, Luca . . . . . . . . . 3-4041
Dols, Shellia . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3768
Fortney, Amanda . . . . . . . . 3-4289
Gandreti, Vijaya . . . . . . . . . 3-4580
Gorreta, Francesco . . . . . . . 3-2672
Schlauch, Karen . . . . . . . . . 3-4269
Charles Bailey at 3-4271 was the former head of USAMRIID and joined the Center in April 2001. He continued to do research with Ames after 9/11. Dr. Alibek reports that shortly after the mailings, he wrote FBI Director Mueller and offered his services but was advised that they already had assembled a large group. A 2004 report describes research done by Dr. Alibek and his colleagues using Delta Ames obtained from NIH for a research project done for USAMRIID. There were two grants from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency from 2001. One $3.6 million grant dated to July 2001 and the other was previous to that.
Ali Al Timimi had the same telephone number that Dr. Victor Morozov of the Center for Biodefense would later have when he joined the faculty and occupied the newly constructed Bull Run Building, which opened in late 2004 (Rm. #362). Dr. Morozov focuses on the development of new bioassay methods for express analysis, high-throughput screening and proteomics. He has recently developed a new electrospray-based technology for mass fabrication of protein microarrays. Dr. Morozov is currently supervising a DOE -funded research project directed at the development of ultra-sensitive express methods for detection of pathogens in which slow diffusion of analytes is replaced by their active transport controlled and powered by external forces (electric, magnetic, gravitational or hydrodynamic). His homepage explains that: “A variety of projects are available for students to participate in 1. Develop methods for active capturing of viruses and cells. 2. AFM imaging of macromolecules, viruses and cells. 3. Develop active immunoassay. 4. Analyze forces operating in the active assay of biomolecules and viral particles. 5. Develop immobilization techniques for antibodies and other biospecific molecules. 6. Study crystallization dynamics and morphology of organic and inorganic crystals in the presence of protein impurities. 7. Develop software to analyze motion of beads. 8. Develop software to analyze patterns in drying droplets. 9. Develop an electrostatic collector for airborne particles.”
Al-Timimi obtained a doctorate from George Mason University in 2004 in the field of computational biology — a field related to cancer research involving genome sequencing. He successfully defended his thesis 5 weeks after his indictment. Curt Jamison, Timimi’s thesis advisor, coauthor and loyal friend, was in Prince William II (Discovery Hall) Rm. 181A. The staff of Advanced Biosystems was in Rm. 160, 162, 177, 254E and several others. Computational sciences offices were intermixed among the Hadron personnel on the first floor of Prince William II to include 159, 161, 166A, 167, 181 B and 181C. Rm. 156B was Charles Bailey, former commander of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, who was head of the Center for Biodefense. Defense contractor Hadron had announced the appointment of Dr. Bailey as Vice-President of Advanced Biosystems in early April 2001. “Over 13 years, Dr. Bailey had served as a Research Scientist, Deputy Commander for Research, Deputy Commander and Commander at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute. As a USAMRIID scientist, he designed and supervised the construction of BL-3 containment facilities. His hands-on experience with a wide variety of pathogens is chronicled in 70 published articles. During his 4 years with the Defense Intelligence Agency, he published numerous articles assessing foreign capabilities regarding biological weapons.” When I asked Dr. Bailey to confirm Al-Timimi’s room number relative to his own, his only response was to refer me to University counsel. Counsel then never substantively responded to my inquiry regarding their respective room numbers citing student privacy. Ali’s friend and thesis advisor, Dr. Jamison never responded to an emailed query either. GMU understandably is very nervous about losing the $25 million grant for a new BL-3 regional facility to be located very near our country’s capitol.
The reports on the study on the effectiveness of the mailed anthrax in the Canadian experiment was reported in private briefings in Spring and Summer of 2001. An insider thus was not dependent on the published report later that Fall. (The date on the formal report is September 10, 2001).
Dr. Charles Bailey for DIA wrote extensively on the the biothreat posed by other countries (and presumably terrorists). He shared a fax number with Al-Timimi. What came over that fax line in Spring and Summer of 2001? At some point, Dr. Al-Timimi, Dr. Alibek and Dr. Bailey also shared the same maildrop. It certainly would not be surprising that the two directors who headed the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense — and had received the biggest defense award in history for work with Delta Ames under a contract with USAMRIID — would have been briefed on the threat of mailed anthrax. The 1999 short report by William Patrick to Hatfill at SAIC on the general subject was far less important given that it did not relate to actual experimental findings.
Plus, it is common sense that while someone might use as a model something they had surreptitiously learned of — they would not use as a model something in a memo that they had commissioned. Thus, it was rather misdirected to focus on the 1999 SAIC report commissioned by Dr. Hatfill rather than the 2001 Canadian report. The Canadian report related to the anthrax threat sent regarding the detention of Vanguards of Conquest #2 Mahjoub in Canada. Mahjoub had worked with al-Hawsawi in Sudan (the fellow with anthrax spraydrying documents on his laptop). The anthrax threat in late January prompted the still-classified PDB in early February 2001 to President Bush on the subject.
In Fall 2001, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (”AFIP”) had detected silicon dioxide (silica) in the attack anthrax — with a characteristic big spike for the silicon. The reason for the silicon dioxide/silica claimed to have been detected by AFIP has never been explained (and it’s been nearly a half decade). No silica was observable on the SEMs images that Dr. Alibek and Dr. Matthew Meselson saw. The Daschle product was “pure spores.” Was silicon dioxide used as part of a microdroplet cell culture process used prior to drying to permit greater concentration? As explained in a later related patent, the silica could be removed from the surface of the spore through repeated centrifugaton or an air chamber.
Dr. Alibek and Dr. Bailey had filed a patent application in mid-March 2001 involving a microdroplet cell culture technique that used silicon dioxide in a method for concentrating growth of cells. The patent was granted and the application first publicly disclosed in the Spring of 2002. Weren’t the SEMS images and AFIP EDX finding both consistent with use of this process in growing the culture? It’s been suggested informally to me that perhaps the silicon analytical peak was more likely due to silanol from hydrolysis of a silane, used in siliconizing glassware. But didn’t the AFIP in fact also detect oxygen in ratios characteristic of silicon dioxide? Wasn’t the scientist, now deceased, who performed the EDX highly experienced and expert in detecting silica? Hasn’t the AFIP always stood by its report. In its report, AFIP explained: “AFIP experts utilized an energy dispersive X-ray spectrometer (an instrument used to detect the presence of otherwise-unseen chemicals through characteristic wavelengths of X-ray light) to confirm the previously unidentifiable substance as silica.” Perhaps the nuance that was lost — or just never publicly explained for very sound reasons — was that silica was used in the cell culture process and then removed from the spores through a process such as centrifugation.
Dr. Morozov is co-inventor along with Dr. Bailey for a patent “Cell Culture” that explains how the silicon dioxide can be removed from the surface. Perhaps it is precisely this AFIP finding of silicon dioxide (without silica on the SEMs) that is why the FBI came to suspect Al-Timimi in 2003 (rightly or wrongly, we don’t know). The FBI would have kept these scientific findings secret to protect the integrity of the confidential criminal/national security investigation. There was still a processor and mailer to catch — still a case to prove. After 9/11, intelligence collection takes precedence over arrests. As Ron Kessler explains in the new book, Terrorist Watch, many FBI officials feel that they are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. Outside observers are constantly second-guessing them about how to proceed rather than trusting that they are in the best position to balance the competing considerations of national security, intelligence gathering, the pursuit of justice, and the safeguarding of civil liberties. Above all, in disclosing the theory of access to know-how, the FBI has needed to protect the due process rights of Al-Timimi while he defended himself on other charges.
An example from October 2006 of equipment that went missing from GMU’s Discovery Hall was a rotissery hybridization oven belonging to the Center for Biomedical Genomics. “This equipment can be used to manufacture biological agents and genetically modified agents, which could potentially be used as biological weapons,” the Corinne Verzoni explained in her PhD 2007 thesis. “Upon hearing about instances or missing equipment in Discovery Hall, the author contacted campus security who was unaware of instances of missing equipment. Missing equipment should be reported to the equipment liaison. Missing equipment may not be reported to campus security because labs tend to share equipment. Equipment also goes missing because it is not inventoried if it is under $2,000.
One of her other examples was equally dramatic:
“A DI system is a de-ionized water system, which removes the ions that are found in normal tap water. The assistant director for operations noticed the DI system in Discovery Hall was using the entire 100 gallons in two days, which is an enormous amount of water for the four DI taps in the whole building. According to the assistant director for operations, it is difficult to calculate the reason for that much water since no leak was found. A large amount of water used over a short period of time for unknown reasons could indicate that the research is being conducted covertly.”
“A student with legitimate access to Discovery Hall,” she explained, “has easy accessibility to equipment. A student with access to the loading dock could steal equipment on the weekend when campus security is not present in Discovery Hall. A student could also walk out of the entrance with equipment on the weekend without security present.” She concluded: “The events at GMU demonstrate opportunity to create a clandestine lab, the ability to sell items illegally, or the ability to exploit school equipment.” In a late September 2001 interview on NPR on the anthrax threat, Dr. Alibek said: “When we talk and deal with, for example, nuclear weapons, it’s not really difficult to count how much of one or another substance we’ve got in the hands. When you talk about biological agents, in this case it’s absolutely impossible to say whether or not something has been stolen.” A spokesman at the GMU “Office of Media Relations” emailed me in mid-December 2007 noting: “While working toward a doctorate in bioinformatics here at George Mason University, Mr. Al-Timimi had no access to any sensitive or secure materials or matter. If you have any other questions, don’t hesitate to let me know.” When I emailed him questions, he did not know of the answers and then never got back to me.
William Clark, author of Bracing for Armaggedon (2008) describes the Dark Winter exercise from Summer 2000
“In what looks like a potential coup, the FBI has worked with Russian police and intelligence agencies to arrange a ‘sting’ operation that netted a senior Al-Qaeda operative as he was attempting to purchase fifty kilograms of plutonium in Russia. This individual had also made inquiries about obtaining certain biological warfare weapons produced some years earlier by Soviet Union laboratories. The United States needs to craft a careful plan about how much of this to make public and how much to keep under wraps. The Russians are already beginning to leak information that many on the U.S. side want kept classified.”
***
“The security advisor signals for the TV to be turned off. He sits down, and the President stands up and looks around the table.
“In view of the potential extreme urgency of the situation, I am setting tonight’s agenda temporarily aside. I talked just a few minutes ago with Secretary of the Health and Human Services, who confirms that we do indeed have smallpox in Oklahoma City. In fact the latest word I have is that there may be cases up in Pennsylvania and in Georgia as well, although these cases have not yet been confirmed to me by the Secretary. *** We are considering this a bioterrorist attack on the United States.”
Question: Did Ali Al-Timimi know the Dark Winter exercise scenario by reason of being at Discovery Hall of the DARPA-funded Center for Biodefense and sharing a fax and maildrop and water fountain with the leading anthrax scientist and the former deputy commander of USAMRIID?
Presently, Al-Timimi’s prosecution is on remand while the defense is given an opportunity to discover any documents that existed prior to 9/11 about al-Timimi and to address an issue relating to NSA intercepts after 9/11. In May 2007, Ali’s defense counsel has explained to the federal district court, upon a remand by the appeals court, that Mr. Timimi was interviewed by an FBI agent and a Secret Service agent as early as February 1994 in connection with the first World Trade Center attack. The agents left their business cards which the family kept. Defense counsel Turley further explained that “We have people that were contacted by the FBI and told soon after 9/11 that they believed that Dr. Al-Timimi was either connected to 9/11 or certainly had information about Al Qaeda.” The federal prosecutor, Mr. Kromberg responded: “I’d like to clarify something. Mr. MacMahon (Timimi’s earlier defense counsel) never said that the document that he saw showed that there was electronic surveillance. If there was an interview of Ali Timimi in 1994 and he did not say anything exculpatory about what happened in 2001, it’s hard to imagine how that, how that conceivably could be discoverable in 2003 or 2004.” Kromberg continued: “The same thing with the interview after 9/11. The government never denied that the FBI interviewed Al-Timimi nine days after 9/11. Our position was that there was nothing discoverable about that interview.” The court, for its part, weighed in: “Yes, but I think, I think most prosecutors err on the side of caution on that one, because who determines what is relevant? I mean, again, that’s why we have an adversary system.” According to Al-Timimi’s defense counsel in a court filing, Ali “was described to his brother by the FBI within days of the 9-11 attacks as an immediate suspect in the Al Qaeda conspiracy.”
At a conference on countering biological terrorism in 1999 sponsored by the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies. Dr. Alibek was introduced by a former colleague of Dr. Bailey:
“Dr. Llewellyn: This is rather strange because I just met Dr. Alibek today. He was introduced to me by Dr. Charlie Bailey, who now works for SRA. But Charlie and I were associated with the Army Medical Research and Development Command Defense Program for over 20 years.
***
Dr. Alibek: Thank you very much for your attention.”
Isn’t SRA who Al-Timimi worked for 1999 where he had a high security clearance for work for the Navy? See Milton Viorst’s article “The Education of Ali Al-Timimi. Did Dr. Bailey also work there at SRA in 1999? Did they work together? When I emailed Dr. Bailey in December 2007 to confirm Ali had the room right near his at Discovery Hall he politely referred me to counsel and took no questions. Dr. Alibek and Dr. Popov have told me that Ali is not known to have worked on any biodefense project. Dr. Popova told me I should direct any such questions to Dr. Bailey. Dr. Bailey told me I should direct any questions to University counsel. University counsel declined to answer any questions. This is one of those uncomfortable questions that Condoleeza Rice in 1999 in writing about bioterrorism the public might have to ask about intelligence matters relating to bioterrorism. Unfortunately, it is easier to ask the question than get any answers from this Administration or to deflect them from their sorority panty raid with the relevant investigative leads.
This is still the FBI’s profile of the mailer:
BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT
Based on the selection of Anthrax as the “weapon” of choice by this individual, the offender:
is likely.......
Amerithrax: Linguistic/Behavioral Analysis
November 9, 2001
Amerithrax Press Briefing
Today the FBI is releasing linguistic and behavioral assessments of the person responsible for mailing anthrax-laden letters on September 18 and October 9, 2001. We ask the American public to study these assessments and reflect on whether someone of their acquaintance might fit the profile. If you have credible information that might help identify this person, please contact the FBI immediately.
EVIDENCE DESCRIPTION
Letter 1
One page, hand-printed letter
Transmittal envelope, also similarly hand printed
Addressed to “NBC TV – Tom Brokaw” – No return address
Postmarked Trenton, NJ 09/18/2001 (Tues.)
Letter 2
One page, hand-printed letter
Transmittal envelope, also similarly hand printed
Addressed to “NY Post” – No return address
Postmarked Trenton, NJ 09/18/2001 (Tues.)
Letter 3
One page, hand-printed letter
Transmittal envelope, also similarly hand printed
Addressed to “Senator Daschle – 509 Hart Senate Office Building”
Return address – “4th Grade, Greendale School, Franklin Park, NJ”
Return address zip code – “08852”
Postmarked Trenton, NJ 10/09/2001 (Tues.)
LINGUISTIC ASSESSMENT
It is highly probable, bordering on certainty, that all three letters were authored by the same person. Letters 1 and 2 are identical copies. Letter 3, however, contains a somewhat different message than the other letters. The Anthrax utilized in Letter 3 was much more refined, more potent, and more easily disbursed than letters 1 and 2.
In the past, the public has helped the FBI solve high profile investigations that involved writings by coming forward to identify the author, either by how he wrote or by what he wrote. We are asking for the public’s help here again in the same way.
While the text in these letters is limited, there are certain distinctive characteristics in the author’s writing style. These same characteristics may be evident in other letters, greeting cards, or envelopes this person has written. We hope someone has received correspondence from this person and will recognize some of these characteristics.
The characteristics include:
1. The author uses dashes (”-”) in the writing of the date “09-11-01.” Many people use the slash (”/”) to separate the day/month/year.
2. In writing the number one, the author chooses to use a formalized, more detailed version. He writes it as “1” instead of the simple vertical line.
3. The author uses the words “can not,” when many people prefer to spell it as one word, “cannot.”
4. The author writes in all upper case block-style letters. However, the first letter of the first word of each sentence is written in slightly larger upper case lettering. Also, the first letter of all proper nouns (like names) is slightly larger. This is apparently the author’s way of indicating a word should be capitalized in upper case lettering. For whatever reason, he may not be comfortable or practiced in writing in lower case lettering.
5. The names and address on each envelope are noticeably tilted on a downward slant from left to right. This may be a characteristic seen on other envelopes he has sent.
6. The envelopes are of the pre-stamped variety, the stamps denoting 34 cents, which are normally available directly from the post office. They are not the traditional business size envelopes, but the smaller size measuring approximately 6 1/4” x 3 ½”.
BEHAVIORAL ASSESSMENT
Based on the selection of Anthrax as the “weapon” of choice by this individual, the offender:
is likely an adult male.
if employed, is likely to be in a position requiring little contact with the public, or other employees. He may work in a laboratory. He is apparently comfortable working with an extremely hazardous material. He probably has a scientific background to some extent, or at least a strong interest in science.
has likely taken appropriate protective steps to ensure his own safety, which may include the use of an Anthrax vaccination or antibiotics.
has access to a source of Anthrax and possesses knowledge and expertise to refine it.
possesses or has access to some laboratory equipment; i.e., microscope, glassware, centrifuge, etc.
has exhibited an organized, rational thought process in furtherance of his criminal behavior.
has a familiarity, direct or indirect, with the Trenton, NJ, metropolitan area; however, this does not necessarily mean he currently lives in the Trenton, NJ, area.. He is comfortable traveling in and around this locale.
did not select victims randomly. He made an effort to identify the correct address, including zip code, of each victim and used sufficient postage to ensure proper delivery of the letters. The offender deliberately “selected” NBC News, the New York Post, and the office of Senator Tom Daschle as the targeted victims (and possibly AMI in Florida). These targets are probably very important to the offender. They may have been the focus of previous expressions of contempt which may have been communicated to others, or observed by others.
is a non-confrontational person, at least in his public life. He lacks the personal skills necessary to confront others. He chooses to confront his problems “long distance” and not face-to-face. He may hold grudges for a long time, vowing that he will get even with “them” one day. There are probably other, earlier examples of this type of behavior. While these earlier incidents were not actual Anthrax mailings, he may have chosen to anonymously harass other individuals or entities that he perceived as having wronged him. He may also have chosen to utilize the mail on those occasions.
prefers being by himself more often than not. If he is involved in a personal relationship it will likely be of a self serving nature.
Pre-Offense Behavior
Following the events of September 11, 2001, this person may have become mission oriented in his desire to undertake these Anthrax mailings. He may have become more secretive and exhibited an unusual pattern of activity. Additionally, he may have displayed a passive disinterest in the events which otherwise captivated the Nation. He also may have started taking antibiotics unexpectedly.
Post-Offense Behavior
He may have exhibited significant behavioral changes at various critical periods of time throughout the course of the Anthrax mailings and related media coverage. These may include the following;
1. Altered physical appearance.
2. Pronounced anxiety.
3. Atypical media interest.
4. Noticeable mood swings.
5. More withdrawn.
6. Unusual level of preoccupation.
7. Unusual absenteeism.
8. Altered sleeping and/or eating habits.
These post-offense behaviors would have been most noticeable during critical times, including but not limited to: the mailing of the letters (09/18/01 and 10/09/01), the death of first Anthrax victim, media reports of each anthrax incident, and especially the deaths and illnesses of non-targeted victims.
“the mailer and processor”
BTW - isn’t this Ed’s theory?
“the mailer and processor”
BTW - isn’t this Ed’s theory?
“Near the end of the interview, Ms Thompson stated that she has a new article in the works where she will comment about the visit that Dr. Ivins paid to my web site on July 24, a couple days before he committed suicide. In the interview, Ms Thompson seemed to imply that Ivins began the process of committing suicide right after viewing my web site....”
-Ed Lake
Now there’s a sobering thought.
The New York Times has an article in tomorrow's paper which says that Director Mueller will be grilled on the 16th and 17th.
Under the cell security principles on Aafia’s thumb drive and Ali Mohammed’s computer in California years earlier, it would not at all be surprising that the mailer and processor were not only two individuals — but that they did not know each other.
The CIA’s Foggo used to play poker. I wonder if US Attorney Taylor, experienced in national security matters, thinks it prudent to bluff when he does not what cards the other players are holding. Surely US Attorney Taylor should appreciate that if one of the players is holding five Aces, that player is not going to be bluffed and at some point is going to lay down his hands after the stakes just get higher.
For example, what does Taylor know about Jdey’s whereabouts and activities?
It was.
I had a guy in New Jersey with the know-how, the lab equipment, the motive and everything else needed to make him a good suspect EXCEPT access to the Ames strain. And I knew the FBI was thoroughly checking him out.
I also had a guy in another state with a PERFECT alibi for the date of the first mailing, who was evidently the FBI's first "person of interest" in the case. The searches done of his home after he was fired from (or quit) working at Battelle indicated the authorities may have thought he took something out of a lab that he shouldn't have. Battelle was of of the labs which had samples of the Ames strain.
I put 2 and 2 together and got 3847628.
The evidence against Bruce Ivins is much more compelling than what I had. And it's certainly VASTLY more compelling that anything anyone has against al Qaeda, Dr. Zack, Dr. Hatfill, or any of a hundred other "potential suspects" amateur detectives have identified.
“For example, what does Taylor know about Jdey’s whereabouts and activities?”
Jwho?
is a flask accessed by over a hundred others 
Yes, and the FBI spent a lot of hours checking out all the others. There are logs and records and documents which show when the flask was accessed and by whom. It's standard operating procedure for every investigator to check the alibis of other people who might have had access to a weapon.
At the press conference on August 6, this was said:
MR. PERSICHINI: I've talked already about the extensive investigation that took place from 2005 to 2007. Again, we're talking about a large number of individuals, over 100, who potentially had access to this substance. We had to go through this laborious process to ferret out or exclude those who were not involved. With respect to the other individual you mentioned, we were able to determine that at no time could that individual be put in the presence of that flask from which these spores came.
What’s the answer to this?
“A commenter here on Friday noted what appears to be a rather glaring contradiction in the case against Bruce Ivins. In response to criticisms that the FBI’s case contains no evidence placing Ivins in New Jersey, where the anthrax letters were sent, The Washington Post published an article — headlined “New Details Show Anthrax Suspect Away On Key Day” — which, based on leaks from “government sources briefed on the case,” purported to describe evidence about Bruce Ivins’ whereabouts on September 17 — the day the FBI says the first batch of anthrax letters were mailed from a Princeton, New Jersey mailbox. The Post reported:
A partial log of Ivins’s work hours shows that he worked late in the lab on the evening of Sunday, Sept. 16, signing out at 9:52 p.m. after two hours and 15 minutes. The next morning, the sources said, he showed up as usual but stayed only briefly before taking leave hours. Authorities assume that he drove to Princeton immediately after that, dropping the letters in a mailbox on a well-traveled street across from the university campus. Ivins would have had to have left quickly to return for an appointment in the early evening, about 4 or 5 p.m.
The fastest one can drive from Frederick, Maryland to Princeton, New Jersey is 3 hours, which would mean that Ivins would have had to have dropped the anthrax letters in the New Jersey mailbox on September 17 by 1 p.m. or — at the latest — 2 p.m. in order to be able to attend a 4:00 or 5:00 p.m. meeting back at Ft. Detrick. But had he dropped the letters in the mailbox before 5:00 p.m. on September 17, the letters would have borne a September 17 postmark, rather than the September 18 postmark they bore (letters picked up from that Princeton mailbox before 5 p.m. bear the postmark from that day; letters picked up after 5 p.m. bear the postmark of the next day). That’s why the Search Warrant Affidavit (.pdf) released by the FBI on Friday said this (page 8):
“If the Post’s reporting about Ivins’ September 17 activities is accurate — that he “return[ed to Fort Detrick] for an appointment in the early evening, about 4 or 5 p.m.” — then that would constitute an alibi, not, as the Post breathlessly described it, “a key clue into how he could have pulled off an elaborate crime,” since any letter he mailed that way would have a September 17 — not a September 18 — postmark. Just compare the FBI’s own definition of “window of opportunity” to its September 17 timeline for Ivins to see how glaring that contradiction is.
In theory (and there is no evidence for this at all), Ivins could have left Fort Detrick that night after work and driven to New Jersey, but then the leaked information reported by the Post about Ivins’ September 17 morning “administrative leave” would be completely irrelevant, and according to the Post, that isn’t what the FBI believes occurred (”Authorities assume that he drove to Princeton immediately after” he took administrative leave in the morning). The FBI’s theory as to how and when Ivins traveled to New Jersey on September 17 and mailed the letters is simply impossible, given the statement in their own Probable Cause Affidavit as to “the window of opportunity” the anthrax attacker had to mail the letters in order to have them bear a September 18 postmark. Marcy Wheeler and Larisa Alexandrovna have now noted the same discrepancy. That is a pretty enormous contradiction in the FBI’s case.”
* * * * *
Glenn Greenwald
There was one story in the media about how the FBI believed that Ivins drove to New Jersey in the middle of the day to mail the letters. When it was pointed out that that didn't make much sense, another story appeared in the media which claimed that the FBI believed Ivins drove to New Jersey after work, travelling at night. Then, of course, there were stories in the media about how the FBI changed its answer when the first answer was shown not to work.
The problem is "stories in the media" from unidentified sources.
Ivins had no alibi that would prove he couldn't have driven to New Jersey to mail the letters, and he apparently often drove to distant places to mail things so they couldn't be traced back to him.
FWIW, this link was in an email someone sent to me last night: http://www.truecrimereport.com/2008/08/bruce_ivins_trolled_youtube.php
“Skepticism toward the bureau’s case remains especially pronounced among Dr. Ivins’s former colleagues at the Army laboratory at Fort Detrick, in Maryland.
“Despite the F.B.I.’s scientific and circumstantial evidence, I and many of Dr. Ivins’s former colleagues don’t believe he did it and don’t believe the spore preparations were made at Detrick,” said Dr. Gerry Andrews, a microbiologist who worked at the Army laboratory for nine years and was Dr. Ivins’s boss for part of that time.
Laboratory records obtained by The New York Times show that the anthrax supply labeled RMR-1029, which the F.B.I. linked to the attacks, was stored in 1997 not in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, in Building 1425, but in the adjacent Building 1412. Former colleagues said that its storage in both buildings at different times from 1997 to 2001 might mean that the bureau’s estimate of 100 people with physical access to it was two or three times too low.”
By SCOTT SHANE and ERIC LICHTBLAU
September 6, 2008
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9313528@N05/2738837161/
"This is the first building I was assigned to work in when I first arrived at Fort Detrick in May of 1990. I worked in the Bacteriology Division on the second floor. I assisted in research on Protective antigen (PA), a protein made by Bacillus anthracis, the bacteria which causes anthrax. PA derives its name from the notion that it is the antigen providing protection when one is vaccinated. The people I worked for and with were some of the brightest and best people I ever knew in science. Not everyone I knew is still there..."
Reminds me of all the people who said that the BTK serial killer was a nice guy. He attended church regularly, had a couple of kids, and was even a Cub Scout leader.
“Laboratory records obtained by The New York Times show that the anthrax supply labeled RMR-1029, which the F.B.I. linked to the attacks, was stored in 1997 not in Dr. Ivins’s laboratory, in Building 1425, but in the adjacent Building 1412.”
There were still logs and documents which had to be prepared when using the material in the flasks. Plus, the flasks were under Ivins control at the time of the mailings.
All the New York Times is doing is trying to create doubt about the FBI's findings. If or when the FBI explains how this information makes no difference to the case against Ivins, it will probably be ignored by the media. The media's objective seems to be to attract readers and viewers, not to provide facts to the public.
Re banjo playing, Prunetacos, in this video, I am down at the local public library.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujanZi2WwI8
And here here is another visual I made and uploaded recently to go with banjo playing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHWEgLL-cxU
Interesting post on YouTube by Bruce Ivins about gouging the eyes out of the mole.
You ask who Jdey was.
A BOLO issued for Jday and his sidekick Boussara along with the BOLO for Aafia Siddiqui and Jafar the Pilot (El-Shukrijumah). I believe there would be up to a $5 million reward under the Rewards For Justice program. Al-Timimi’s mentor was a good friend of El-Shukrijahah’s father dating back to his days in Brooklyn.
Jdey was going to be part of the planes operation but then disappeared at the time of the mailings. He had studied biology. Very little has been published about his years in Montreal.
“Authorities name 5th ‘suicide terrorist’ “, CNN, January 25, 2002
http://edition.cnn.com/2002/LAW/01/25/inv.fifth.suspect/index.html
“All the New York Times is doing is trying to create doubt about the FBI’s findings.”
Create doubt?
Like there is no doubt, Ed?
Like there is no doubt, Ed?
I should have said they are trying to feed on the doubts that people have already expressed. It makes for more sensational reporting than just explaining facts and fairly examining all sides of a controversy.
Ed summarizes his theory well:
“I put 2 and 2 together and got 3847628.
The evidence against Bruce Ivins is much more compelling than what I had.”
The FBI Director explained back in 2001 that the theory was baloney.
“It makes for more sensational reporting than just explaining facts”
Do you think Scott Shane does sensational reporting?
“Ed summarizes his theory well:”
“I put 2 and 2 together and got 3847628.”
silicon dioxide
METAL-TO-GLASS JOINT - Patent 3847628 The invention relates to glass industry. A glass containing silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, zirconium dioxide, strontium oxide, sodium oxide, ...” :)
I uploaded this account of the FBI’s fruitless visit to the colonial setting in Dr. Ivins’ hometown. Note the bloodhound bumming out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARhozMjYTyU
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.